Francois Truffaut and the Babe

Francois TruffautOn this day in 1895, Babe Ruth was born. He is generally considered the greatest baseball player of all time. I don’t think this is true. For one thing, it doesn’t make much sense to compare different positions and different times. One thing is true: Ruth was part of a revolution in the game. In the early days, the game was all about being able to finesse the ball into an empty part of the field. But then the game changed to the home run focused game it now is. It doesn’t really matter, but I do think the game was more interesting back then. But I’m not sure that with all the great advances in pitching that batters could still play in the old way. Maybe just hitting the ball as hard as possible is the only option.

Other birthdays: mathematician Scipione del Ferro (1465); duel winner Aaron Burr (1756); French portrait painter Achille Deveria (1800); French Fauvist painter Othon Friesz (1879); ideologue, racist, and big government conservative Ronald Reagan (1911); Hitler’s girlfriend Eva Braun (1912); actor Zsa Zsa Gabor (97!); actor Patrick Macnee (92!); cinematographer Haskell Wexler (92!); actor Rip Torn (83); actor Mike Farrell (75); actor Jacques Villeret (1951); independent filmmaker Robert Townsend (57); and actor Alice Eve (32).

The day, however, belongs to the great film director Francois Truffaut who was born on this day in 1932. I will admit, I’m not a huge fan of the French New Wave. It’s not that I don’t get it. I just don’t especially enjoy it—at least at this point in my life. Truffaut was first a film theorist, and this is where he can be at his most annoying. This very much seeped into his filmmaking. Nonetheless, Truffaut is probably my favorite of the New Wave directors. His first film, The 400 Blows, is the prototypical New Wave film. And it is very good. Personally, I’m more fond of Shoot the Piano Player. I don’t really like to talk about Jules and Jim, seeing as how much it has scarred me. Truffaut went to Hollywood and made Fahrenheit 451, which I think is a very weak effort. The film that most stands out to me is Day for Night, which I still really love. Here is the great “cat actor” scene:

Happy birthday Francois Truffaut!

Night of the Still Living George Romero

George RomeroOn this day in 1895, the British character actor Nigel Bruce was born. He’s the kind of guy you see in a lot of gold age films like Rebecca. But he is mostly known for playing Dr Watson in the Basil Rathbone Sherlock Holmes films. He was the person I was thinking of when I talked about how the series Sherlock was better because of the way they had updated Watson. There is something distinctly uncool now about the original conception of the character: sure, he was an old army man, but did he have to be overweight and even more obtuse than a normal person? Anyway, Bruce was great at playing that character. And I have to say, those old movies are still great.

Charles Lindbergh was born in 1902. Most people think of him as a great American hero who flew a plane across the Atlantic. I think of him as an antisemitic asshole and a Nazi sympathizer. It amazes me that what has lasted all this time is the hero and not the cautionary tale about racism in America.

Clyde Tombaugh was born in 1906. I met him in 1990, when he lectured at my school about his discovery of Pluto. He was an interesting guy. But as far as I’m concerned, Pluto should not be classified as a planet. Or if it is, then there are a couple of asteroids that ought to be considered planets. As planets go, Pluto is disappointing. What’s more, there are very possibly many other “planets” orbiting far from the sun. I’d rather just have eight set planets and call these other things something else. But I don’t particularly care, so long as we are consistent. If Pluto is a planet, then at least, Ceres is a planet.

Rock legend Alice Cooper is 66. I think he’s great. But even more important, in the 1970s, he had a great band. Here he is in 1979 doing “School’s Out” with Steve Hunter and Davey Johnstone (I couldn’t find any with Dick Wagner) on guitar, Fred Mandel on keyboard, Prakash John on bass, and Pentti Glan on drums. Pretty much the Bob Ezrin crowd. It’s great and hilarious the way Cooper always is. Enjoy:

Other birthday: playwright Pierre de Marivaux (1688); mathematician Nikolay Umov (1846); aeronautical engineer Ludwig Prandtl (1875); cubist Fernand Leger (1881); civil rights activist Rosa Parks (1913); feminist writer Betty Friedan (1921); screenwriter David Newman (1937); computer scientist Ken Thompson (71); and boxer Oscar De La Hoya (41).

The day, however, belongs to George Romero who is 74 today. He was an independent filmmaker when it really meant something. And he made one of the greatest horror films ever: Night of the Living Dead. And then, in 1990, he wrote (with Tom Savini directing) a remake for the next generation. Although not important in the way that the original was, it is a perfect horror film. Every little bit from the original film that bugged me was taken out. It is a great film and I really do wish that fans would get over themselves and accept that it is a more enjoyable film than the original. Regardless, Romero has gone on to make other films, many of them quite enjoyable. But only one film revolution per director!

Here is the trailer for the remake. Really: if you haven’t seen it, do check it out. It really doesn’t get any better:

Happy birthday George Romero!

Shelley Berman Wants a Window

Shelley BermanOn this day in 1874, the great writer Gertrude Stein was born. Her work is difficult, but playful. I’ve often thought that she isn’t as big a literary star as, say, Joyce because she was a woman. On the other hand, her fascist sympathies doubtless don’t help. She’s still interesting to read, but I find it tiring as I do most of the avant-garde writers. You know the drill: it’s important but doesn’t really age well. But I still enjoy listening to Four Saints in Three Acts.

Norman Rockwell was born in 1894. I admire the wit of his work. He strikes me as the kind of guy parents like to keep away from their children because he would inspire them to be devilish. Of course, being a representational artists in the 20th century has tended to make people dismiss him. And now he’s seen as totally inoffensive. But I think we could use Rockwell today. Our society has become obsessed with celebrities from Justin Bieber to Jesus Christ. And yes, Rockwell was sentimental at times. But he wasn’t romantic—he celebrated actual humans—you know, people who work for a living. It’s amazing what a radical concept that’s become.

Other birthdays: composer Felix Mendelssohn (1809); newspaper editor Horace Greeley (1811); bank robber Pretty Boy Floyd (1904); actor Robert Earl Jones (1911); actor Blythe Danner (71); the least annoying The Kinks brother Dave Davies (67); actor Nathan Lane (58); situational economist Greg Mankiw (56); and actor Maura Tierney (49).

The day, however, belongs to one of the great stand-up comedians of my youth Shelley Berman who is 89 today. He was basically just a storyteller. Much of his work doesn’t especially have punchlines. He just has an amusing way of looking at the world. His buttermilk routine is more typical of his work. But here he is doing one of his classic telephone routines, which is brilliant and as funny as ever:

Happy birthday Shelley Berman!

The Rich Are Afraid of Democracy

Howard BealeYesterday was Paddy Chayefsky’s birthday. That got me thinking about the movie Network. That’s the film where just-fired longtime news anchor Howard Beale gives his farewell to the viewers and goes on to rant, “I’m mad as hell and I’m not going to take it anymore!” It’s a sentiment that pretty much everyone can identify with. The world is not fair and if you focus on on it, it is bound to make you angry.

It is the ultimate example of populist rage. And so it isn’t surprising that the rich might be afraid of it. This morning in Politico, Ben White wrote, Why the Rich Are Freaking Out. As he put it, “The nation’s wealthiest, denizens of the loftiest slice of the 1 percent, appear to be having a collective meltdown.” And why? One example: “Residents of Manhattan’s tony Upper East Side say the progressive mayor didn’t plow their streets as a form of frosty revenge.” The heart bleeds for these people!

It reminds me of when I was first driving. My greatest fear was that I would get a traffic ticket and my insurance rates would go up. That is the kind of thing you worry about when you basically have nothing to worry about. Now I worry that the police will arrest me for looking at them wrong as I walk down the street. Other people worry that my government will drop a bomb on their houses. It’s all relative and I don’t blame the rich for freaking out over such little things. But that doesn’t mean anyone else should care that the lives of the rich are so great that they see revolution behind every snowplow delay.

Much of the concern that the rich feel comes from the Occupy Movement. But they never struck me as particularly angry. The group from the last few years that most exemplifies Howard Beale is the Tea Party Movement. They are the angry ones. They are the hysterical ones. They are the revolutionary ones. If we should be concerned about social disruption, it is the Tea Party and not Occupy that the rich should focus on.

People tend to forget what happens after Beale gives his big populist scream therapy session. First, of course, he becomes a big populist star. But increasingly, Beale talks about corporate control. This causes the rich to freak out, so Beale is taken to see the network’s chairman who, lit as though he were God, convinces Beale to preach the new world order where the little people don’t matter. Instead of “I’m mad as hell and I’m not going to take it anymore” it is “I’m mad as hell and there is nothing I can do about it.” So Beale is turned from a populist into a corporate mouthpiece. Unsurprisingly, rating slide and so the network assassinates Beale on the air.

There is a connection here to the Tea Party. Of course, the Tea Party was never populist. The group was basically a corporate creation. If it hadn’t been for Fox News and hate radio pushing it, it never would have gotten off the ground. That’s to say nothing of all the money that the Koch brothers and others put into it. And above all, the Tea Party didn’t start because of the bailout of the big banks. It was only after the government tried to help homeowners that the group started. So the Tea Party was never populist.

But in the beginning, they sounded populist. But very quickly, they became nothing more than a mouthpiece for the Republican Party. Now they are for the common conservative definition of economic freedom, which is just the idea that the rich should be able to do whatever they want. Constraints caused by poverty or private businesses are simply defined out of existence. They believe in the theoretical freedom to get rich and once rich to do whatever they please. It’s like they follow that evil bearded Spock in “Mirror, Mirror” with the philosophy: the needs of the few outweigh the needs of the many! (“I have been—and always shall be—your enemy.”)

Thus the rich do not fear the Tea Party Movement, regardless of how marginal they are with their rhetoric about armed rebellion and their embrace of gun culture. They do fear the Occupy Movement, regardless of how bureaucratic they are with their economic policy reports. But that’s the thing. Howard Beale is not the real threat that the rich fear. They aren’t worried about an armed rebellion. They are worried that the people might wake up to the unacceptable level of inequality that we face. They are worried that their taxes might be raised a little bit.

This is what’s behind the anxieties of the rich. To them, closing the carried interest loophole would be Kristallnacht. Maybe it’s already happened. Maybe that was what last year’s increase of the top marginal tax rate to 39.6% was. Regardless, they don’t fear populism; they fear democracy.

My Partner the Ghost

Randall and Hopkirk (Deceased)When I was perhaps 8 years old, I saw a television show one Sunday evening. It was called, My Partner the Ghost.

Basically, it was a show about two private investigators. The twist was — What a surprise! — one them was a ghost. So it was basically like The Rockford Files, but it was funny and British. I loved it. Really. I was so excited — it was the best thing I had ever seen. So I tuned in the next week… But it wasn’t on. So I showed up the week after… Nope. It never reappeared.

Television in the 1970s

Now for you youngins out there, this was in 1972 or 1973. All we had to guide us through the entertainment bonanza that was network television was a weekly magazine called TV Guide. It contained all the local listings.

I supposed that I could have gone through it line by line and looked for My Partner the Ghost. But I didn’t. Or maybe I did. I don’t remember. I do remember my profound sadness in missing out on what was the best show ever.

In general, I have a really bad memory. But some information has stuck in my brain with a tenacity that makes no sense. And over all these years — Four decades! — the title of the teasing television show stayed with me.

Rediscovering My Partner the Ghost

For no reason that I can explain, the show came back into my mind. I thought, “At the very least, the entertainment overdose that is the internet must offer a Wikipedia page and some clips from the show.” Indeed. It offered that and more!

When I searched for “My Partner the Ghost,” Google offered me a Wikipedia page to Randall and Hopkirk (Deceased). I quickly found that this was the original name of the series.

It was changed to the “ghost” title for distribution in America. I think that was a good choice. I can appreciate the original title now, but as a kid, it wouldn’t have made any sense. Plus, it doesn’t exactly trip off the tongue. And “Hopkirk”? What the hell?! I’ve never heard that name in my life. Anyway, “My Partner the Ghost” has the exact same sound as “My Mother the Car” — a very American title for a very American show.

I can’t tell if the show was a success or not. It only ran for one season, which in those days meant 26 episodes. But it may have just been intended that way. It is certainly the case that it has been shown a lot since. What’s more, I wonder that a failed series would have been exported to the United States.

Regardless, it seems to be popular to this day. It has, for example, a fan site. And the Wikipedia page has a complete listing of episodes with full summaries — something you can’t say for My mother the Car.[1]

As Charming as Ever

Last night, I found the first episode — “My Late Lamented Friend and Partner” — so I watched it. It isn’t great, but it is a solid show — especially for the time.

What’s more, I know why 8-year-old Frank loved it. Marty Hopkirk (the ghost) is very much like me: a bit too excitable, bordering on childish, persistent to the point of annoyance. It’s kind of funny, actually. Not many boys would look at the character and think, “That’s what a man should be!”

Regardless, I found the show to be charming. And I’m very curious to see where the show goes from the pilot, which you can see in the following video:


Afterword

My Mother the Car is renowned for being one of the worst television shows ever made. I’ve never seen it, but I assume this is not a correct appraisal.

There is a tendency for some authority to announce that, for example, “MacArthur Park” or “A Horse With No Name” is the worst song ever. And then people parrot that back. In the early 80s, I remember reading in some magazine that My Mother the Car was the worst television show ever. It just became a thing.

I will admit, I don’t think much of Jerry Van Dyke. But the show was created by Chris Hayward and Allan Burns who created The Munsters and Dudley Do-Right from The Rocky and Bullwinkle Show. What’s more, Burns went on to create The Mary Tyler Moore Show and Rhoda with My Mother the Car writer James L Brooks.

Regardless, maybe the show was terrible. But even so, that would also make a certain group of people love it. So I think there is genuine affection for My Partner the Ghost.

Alan Alda but it Should Be Ernst Lubitsch

Alan AldaOn this day in 1887, the great pianist Arthur Rubinstein was born. He is especially known for his performances of Chopin, so here is Nocturne Opus 9, No 2:

The great film director Ernst Lubitsch was born in 1892. Despite the fact that he died at the age of only 55 of his sixth heart attack, he managed to make some of the best comedies of the 1940s. These included: The Shop Around the Corner, Heaven Can Wait, and one of my very favorites, Carole Lombard in her last film, To Be or Not to Be. Here is the beginning of the film:

John Banner was born in 1910. He was the actor in Hogan’s Heroes who played Sergeant Schultz. But if you go back to television throughout the 1950s and 1960s, you will see him here and there. He made the show work. Without him, you have Nazis on one side and the Allies on the other. And as much as identify with the Allies, all they do in the show is go around blowing up people who are mostly just caught in the middle. Schultz was the heart of the show. He is the perfect example of what I call the 95%: people who just want to live their lives.

Singer-songwriter Sarah McLachlan is 46. Here is her music video for “Possession”:

Other birthdays: composer Gregor Werner (1693); philosopher Vladimir Solovyov (1853); William S Burroughs Version 1 (1857); novelist Colette (1873); theater director Vsevolod Meyerhold (1874); painter Jackson Pollock (1912); puppeteer Harry Corbett (1918); musician Cash McCall (73); evil pastor Rick Warren (60); the great journalist Michael Hastings (1980); and actor Elijah Wood (33).

The day, however, belongs to writer, director, and actor Alan Alda who is 78 today. I’m not that fond of him as an actor, but he’s perfectly fine. And there is nothing noteworthy about his directing. But he really is a damned good screenwriter. He wrote some of the best episodes of M*A*S*H as well as a number of good films. The Seduction of Joe Tynan is almost creepy given many of the political scandals we’ve lived through since. I suppose nothing ever changes. The Four Seasons is a beautiful script, although it could have been a play. I still have a guilty love of Sweet Liberty. I know that in a fundamental way, the film doesn’t really work. But you do get to see Lillian Gish on film at 91. (She’s wonderful in it!) The big problem is that I don’t think Alda is really the guy to write satire; he’s seems too nice and disinclined to offend. Anyway, it’s too bad he doesn’t seem to write and direct anymore.

Happy birthday Alan Alda!

Rian Johnson Delights and Disappoints

BrickI’m am fond of the film The Brothers Bloom. It is a mess of a plot with a totally inappropriate ending.[1] But there is so much to like in the film that it triumphs nonetheless. But even more than that, it is a film that has made me want to check out other things that writer-director Rian Johnson has done. And last night, I did just that by watching his first feature film, Brick.

I try to stay away from being a film ombudsman. My opinions about film are not representative of what other people think. What’s more, my opinion about a film can change dramatically over the course of a short time. But above all, I don’t think it helps anyone to say that a film is good or bad. I could easily write bad reviews for my very favorite films—and vise versa. And the problem is greatly increased when dealing with a work that is trying to do something different.

Brick is such a film. Johnson put Dashiell Hammett into a high school. It is idiosyncratic to say the least. This is especially true because the film is more an homage to the books than it is to the film noir of the 1940s and 1950s. There is no softening of edges here. As a result, the film is very smart and often hilarious. The problem with it for me is that I never got past the conceit of it.

This is especially true of Joseph Gordon-Levitt, who has to speak some of the most silly dialog ever:

No, bulls would gum it. They’d flash their dusty standards at the wide-eyes and probably find some yegg to pin, probably even the right one. But they’d trample the real tracks and scare the real players back into their holes, and if we’re doing this I want the whole story.

It is all played totally straight. If anything, the performances are too extreme. But Johnson never lets the viewer forget the absurdity of the film. At one point, Gordon-Levitt’s character is badly beaten and nearly killed by the drug kingpin’s henchman. After everything is worked out, the kingpin, who still lives at home, has his mother give cereal and juice to Gordon-Levitt. Before leaving, the mother kisses the kingpin on the cheek and he says, “Thanks, mom.” High concept stuff.

And I think it all works. It is certainly what Johnson was trying to do. And he shows a surprisingly firm hand for a rooking feature film director. But it is entirely an intellectual experience. There is absolutely not a single character in the film that the viewer can care about, because in a very real way, there are no characters in the film. There are just archetypes from the genre. So the ending is just an intellectual exercise of wrapping up a plot that I didn’t care about involving characters I didn’t believe in.

Still, I watched the whole film because it was engaging. In addition to it being a loving and twisted love letter to a genre I like, it was visually interesting—far more so than the noir films themselves. Johnson clearly worked very hard on this, because he has very little to work with in terms of production design. The cinematography by Steve Yedlin was very good, and surprisingly consistent for such a cheap film. But more than this, I thought the framing of shots was particularly good. I don’t know who was responsible for that—probably Yedlin and Johnson together. And the editing helped a lot, although the jump cutting sometimes annoyed me.

In the end, Brick is something like “the best student film ever made!” And that’s a good and bad thing. Having now seen Rian Johnson’s first two feature films, I don’t think I’m any closer to understanding his work. To some extent, I think people have given him a lot of money to play in his sandbox without much thought for who might be interesting in what he produced. That’s certainly the case with Brick. The savage editing required for The Brothers Bloom is another. But there is no doubt that Johnson’s creative flashes are superior to the vast majority of Hollywood directors. I’ll have to check out his newest film Looper.

Afterword

This has nothing to do with the film, but I can’t get it out of my head. “The clothes she wears, the sexy ways, make an old man wish for younger days…”


[1] The problem is not that Stephen dies. The problem is that the rest of the film doesn’t prepare for it, either in terms of plot or theme. There is a bit of foreshadowing, but that is about it. The ending also doesn’t make practical sense.

Class Distinction in The King’s Speech

The King's SpeechI finally got around to watching The King’s Speech last night. It is a very good film. It looks great and the acting is flawless. It is that most unusual of films: a character-based narrative. The plot only matters in so much as it motivates the characters. And the two primary characters are really interesting. I wanted to know more about them. When the film ended, I wanted another hour. In an age when I think most films are an hour or more too long, The King’s Speech was a delightful change.

The film tells the story of stuttering Prince Albert (eventually King George VI) and his work with speech therapist Lionel Logue. According to everyone else, they form a friendship over this work. I don’t see it this way. They form a relationship. Friendships require some kind of equality. For example, people don’t have friendships with their pets. There is no doubt that Albert is fond of Logue, and apparently closer to him emotionally than he is to any of his friends. (Although Albert claims to not having any friends.)

The whole power dynamic is exactly what we see in The Madness of King George between king and Dr Willis. In that film, King George III tells Willis at the end not to look him in the eye because he is no longer the patient. Willis was necessary to George for a certain period of time—just like a coachman. But there is never any question that George is royalty and Willis is not, regardless of how useful he may be.

The exact same dynamic goes on in The King’s Speech. But it is so much more richly rendered than in The Madness of King George. This is primarily due to the fact that Albert was not insane and because of the kind of work he required. But over and over, Albert makes clear their distinction. This is especially apparent two-thirds through the film when the king learns that Logue has no formal training. Logue has never claimed to have had formal training, and in the film, he seems to be Albert’s last option—all the well-credentialed speech therapists having been tried. But Logue’s success with Albert doesn’t seem to matter. It is again: class and class alone.

All of this probably makes Albert seem like a horrible person, but he is not. He is quite sympathetic. I don’t blame a man for believing what he’s been told all his life: that he was born better than other men and they are rightly beneath him. What’s more Colin Firth plays him with such barely controlled anger and terror that it is impossible not to feel his pain. What’s more, within the cultural straight jacket of his upbringing, Albert seems to be a decent man. If you have to have a king, he is a better man for the job than most.

For me, however, there is one great man in this film and it is not the king. Logue is a fascinating character. He is an amateur actor who loves Shakespeare. There is a funny bit in the film where Albert’s wife tells Albert that he ought to check out Logue because, “His approach seems rather different.” This cuts directly to Logue auditioning for an amateur production of Richard III. It is rather bad, but very much what you would expect from a speech therapist who loves the words more than theater. He is the sort of man that many would ridicule, but he is blinded by his love of it. And as a result, he is a greater man than any of his detractors. Geoffrey Rush completely captures this nerd-aspect of the character without ever letting it slip into a type. I thought the performance was even more impressive than Firth’s.

The supporting cast was also quite good. Helena Bonham Carter as Albert’s wife was very good. Derek Jacobi is wonderfully pretentious as the Archbishop. Michael Gambon as George V does great delirium, but let’s face it: I’m just in love with his voice. But the standout performance was Guy Pearce as Edward VIII. No one is quite so good as Pearce is at doing subtle arrogance. It is just perfect for Edward. It would have been easy to sympathize with Edward. After all, he abdicates the throne so he can marry the woman he loves. But Pearce gives him that extra something that just makes you want to punch him.

Ultimately, I would have rather had a play with the two characters and maybe a small supporting cast. And as I think is clear, I’m far more interested in Logue than the king. But the filmmakers weren’t interested in making a play focused on Logue. Given what they were trying to do, I think it is a perfect film. It works on every level.

Afterword

Looking at the actual historical figures, the class differences are even greater. Again, I don’t doubt that the men had real affection for each other. But they were not friends. The royal family was and still is the clearest example of our ridiculously arbitrary social system.

Chainsaws, Film, and Tobe Hooper

Tobe HooperOn this day in 1627, the great scientist Robert Boyle was born. He did a whole lot of stuff (hence “scientist”) but he is mostly known for Boyle’s Law. This is the observation that the pressure of a gas is inversely proportional to its volume. In chemistry, we normally learn this as a subset of the ideal gas law: PV = nRT. So as you can see, this is Boyle’s Law when temperature is held constant: PV = k. Anyway, I long for the days when all of this was new and exciting and I worried about the difference between ideal and real gases.

The great mathematician Joseph-Louis Lagrange was born in 1736. He did many amazing things with math that I only vaguely understand. But I mostly love him because of Lagrangian mechanics. And you know me: anything that makes classical mechanics more fun is a wonderful thing. I’m just a crazy like that. Of course, it is only with Legendre’s work that it all gets crazy fun. But we’ll have to go into that later.

The great Scottish poet Robert Burns was born in 1759. I’m very fond on him to a large extent because of his political beliefs. I think they were, at base, very much like those of Thomas Paine, although I’m very aware just how broad a generalization that is regarding both men. But he was also a great lyricist. How can you not love something like “A Red, Red Rose”:

O my Luve’s like a red, red rose
That’s newly sprung in June;
O my Luve’s like the melodie
That’s sweetly play’d in tune.

As fair art thou, my bonnie lass,
So deep in luve am I:
And I will luve thee still, my dear,
Till a’ the seas gang dry…

The great Etta James was born in 1938. It is hard for me to believe that she’s been dead for two years now. Here she is doing “I’d Rather Be Blind” at the Montreux Jazz Festival in 1975:

Other birthdays: the great Dutch Golden Age painter Govert Flinck (1615); philosopher Friedrich Heinrich Jacobi (1743); the great writer Somerset Maugham (1874); another great writer Virginia Woolf (1882); bluesman Sleepy John Estes (1899); the real Sybil, who almost certainly didn’t have multiple personalities, Shirley Ardell Mason (1923); and the great medium distance runner Steve Prefontaine (1951).

The day, however, belongs to Tobe Hooper who is 71 today. He is best know for The Texas Chain Saw Massacre. I’ll admit, I’m not a huge fan of that film. But when it came out, everyone expected great things of Hooper, because young independent horror filmmakers often go on to do great works later. Hooper, not so much. Mostly, he’s just gone on to make other horror films. And I think that’s great. Making horror films is a great thing to do. And Hooper has made some really good ones, including the megahit Poltergeist. I think he will be appreciated a lot more in 20 years than he is now (unlike Sam Raimi). I mean, after watching the following trailer for Spontaneous Combustion, how can not want to see it?

Happy birthday Tobe Hooper!

Eisenstein and Manet

Sergei EisensteinThe Twenty-fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution was ratified on this day fifty years ago. It made poll taxes illegal on the both the state and federal levels. I think it is really interesting given that the voter ID laws are exactly the same thing: a way to make voting something that must be earned instead of a right so as to disenfranchise the poor. But I feel sure that if it ever got to the Supreme Court (UPDATE: see Rick Fine’s excellent comment and links below), somehow the five conservative justices would see it in a whole different light. But you will have to forgive me. I’m sick and grumpy.

On this day in 1832, the great painter Edouard Manet was born. Although considered an impressionist, he was more the proto-impressionist. He is probably the most important artist in the move from Realism to Impressionism. I really admire his work, and I would include more details and an image if I were feeling better. Maybe I’ll update it tomorrow.

Other birthdays: big handwriting John Hancock (1737); French writer Stendhal (1783); physicist Ernst Abbe (1840); the great mathematician David Hilbert (1862); physicist Paul Langevin (1872); comedian Ernie Kovacs (1919); actor Chita Rivera (81); actor Sonny Chiba (75); actor Rutger Hauer (70); and TV’s MacGyver, Richard Dean Anderson.

The day, however, belongs to the great filmmaker Sergei Eisenstein who was born on this day in 1898. After having Griffith yesterday, I hate to give Eisenstein so little attention. He is best known for Battleship Potemkin, although he made a number of other important films. I am a great admirer of October: Ten Days That Shook the World. But my admiration isn’t with regard to it as a propaganda film. To be honest, I’ve always thought that aspect of Eisenstein’s work was over-intellectual, and I don’t think anyone really understood without having it explained. But it is an immensely powerful film, even today.

Here is one of the most famous movie scenes eve, the Odessa Steps from Battleship Potemkin. It is both amazingly suspenseful and it makes its point as clearly as one could in film:

Happy birthday Sergei Eisenstein!

D W Griffith Plus More Than Any Day Deserves

D W GriffithEight years ago, Evo Morales became the first indigenous president of Bolivia. He seems to have done a pretty decent job. He, of course, is largely dismissed as a socialist here in the United States. But then, so is the conservative created, free-market healthcare system we now call Obamacare. Morales, like pretty much all reasonable people, believes in a mixed-economy. You know what a mixed-economy is, don’t you? It’s the economy that the United States has always had! Wake up conservatives! Evo! Evo! Evo!

On this day in 1552 or 1554 (It was a very long labor!) Walter Raleigh was born. What, exactly was he anyway? I guess you could say that, very much like today, Raleigh was famous for being famous. It is interesting that he was put to death for political reasons. But I am mostly interested in him because of his relationship to Christopher Marlowe. Marlowe had written the poem, “The Passionate Shepherd to His Love.” It is a very sweet poem that I’ve set to music. The poem was very popular, but the older Raleigh apparently thought it was childish and so wrote a response poem, “The Nymph’s Reply to the Shepherd.” It’s a good poem, but it is very clear why were remember Marlowe today as a great poet of that period and we remember Raleigh for throwing his coat over a mud puddle for Queen Elizabeth—a story I feel is almost certainly apocryphal.

It’s a good day for Elizabethans! Francis Bacon was born on this day in 1561. (Short labor.) He is known today as the man who helped Christopher Marlowe who actually wrote all those plays people ignorantly attribute to “The Immortal Bard of Stratford on Avon.” Woody Allen explains all this in his short story, “But Soft… Real Soft.” Read the whole thing; it is one of the funniest things I’ve ever read. If you want to know about Bacon, click his name above. Basically, he was a brilliant philosopher and scientist who was not beheaded, even though he only lived as long as Raleigh. Here’s Allen with some history about Bacon that I’ll bet you didn’t know:

We all realize Shakespeare (Marlowe) borrowed his plots from the ancients (moderns); however, when the time came to return the plots to the ancients he had used them up and was forced to flee the country under the assumed name of William Bard (hence the term “immortal bard”) in an effort to avoid debtor’s prison (hence the term “debtor’s prison”). Here Sir Francis Bacon enters into the picture.

Bacon was an innovator of the times who was working on advanced concepts of refrigeration. Legend has it he died attempting to refrigerate a chicken. Apparently the chicken pushed first. In an effort to conceal Marlowe from Shakespeare, should they prove to be the same person, Bacon had adopted the fictitious name Alexander Pope, who in reality was Pope Alexander, head of the Roman Catholic Church and currently in exile owing to the invasion of Italy by the Bards, last of the nomadic hordes (the Bards give us the term “immortal bard”), and years before had galloped off to London, where Raleigh awaited death in the tower.

The great Sam Cooke was born 1931. I don’t think I really need to say anything about his work. He was a great songwriter and an unforgettable singer. His death is still a mystery. I tend to think that it was as simple as some people tried to rob him, it got out of hand and they killed him. We will never know, but his murder not only deprived him of his life, it deprived the rest of us of unknown amounts of great music. Here is the only video I could easily find of Cooke actually performing live. It is a really good version of Dylan’s “Blowin’ in the Wind,” which Cooke later wrote the great response song, “A Change Is Gonna Come.”

Other birthdays: the great French philosopher Pierre Gassendi (1592); the great fetes galantes painter Nicolas Lancret (1690); the great Romantic poet Lord Byron (1788); Swedish playwright August Strindberg (1849); Russian mystic Grigori Rasputin (1869); blues guitarist Blind Willie Johnson (1897); the great Russian physicist Lev Landau (1908); four great actors: Piper Laurie (82), Bill Bixby (1934), Seymour Cassel (79), and the best of the bunch, John Hurt (74); crime novelist Joseph Wambaugh (77); singer and songwriter Steve Perry (65); the great filmmaker Jim Jarmusch (61); actor Linda Blair (55); and actor Diane Lane (49).

The day, however, belongs to the most important filmmaker ever, D W Griffith, who was born on this day in 1875. Oh, how I hate talking about him. How I wish he had never made The Birth of a Nation, so that I don’t always have to talk about racism. So forget it. He seems to have been a decent man with some real confusion on matters racial and historical.

But in terms of art, Nation was revolutionary. In many ways, his next major film Intolerance was equally so. It is interesting to watch the early films—including Griffith’s—as they slowly evolve until Nation, which is shockingly modern. Quite suddenly, Griffith offers the world the full pallet of cinematic syntax. And then in Intolerance breaks altogether new ground in terms of its editing.

To start with, Intolerance takes place during four points in time spread out over thousands of years. But this is all intercut—the story is not told linearly. Then on top of that—on the microscale—we see parallel editing exactly as we see it today. Here is a very short (26 second) example. We see three different locations: the jail cell, the scaffolding, and the line cutters behind the wall on the scaffolding. Griffith cuts between them to provide the sense that they are all happening at the same time. They still teach this stuff to kids in film school, 98 years later!

Happy birthday D W Griffith!

Wishing for Better Than Benny Hill

Benny HillI had gotten rather spoiled the last few days with some pretty good birthdays to choose from. In fact, the great abundance of them made me give short shrift to people I normally would have spent more time on. But that’s why I’m the best at exactly what I do.

In 1820, Joseph Wolf was born. He was a great illustrator who specialized in natural history. In fact, by the middle of his life, he was the preferred illustrator of such luminaries Alfred Russel Wallace and Henry Walter Bates. His work is great and it makes me long for the days before photography, because of it idealized the animals. In field guides, I think that can be helpful. Regardless, check out his work.

Henri Duparc was born in 1848. He was a French composer of the late Romantic period. But we really ought to have a better name for that period, because it doesn’t sound romantic to me at all. It sounds transitional. I think you can see this in the following performance of L’Invitation au voyage, which is one of his earliest works:

Karl Wallenda was born in 1905. He was the founder of The Flying Wallendas. What I find fascinating about him is his death. At the age of 73, he was doing a wire walk across two ten story towers in Puerto Rico. But because of a screw-up in the set-up of the wire he fell to his death. I am fascinated what people think as they fall to their deaths. And I cannot read about hire wire acts without squirming, so I will move on.

Other birthdays: Revolutionary War hero and furniture maker brand name Ethan Allen (1738); Confederate general, who was only 39 when he died, Stonewall Jackson (1824); number theorist Ivan Mikheevich Pervushin (1827); co-founder and first executive director of the ACLU, Roger Nash Baldwin (1884); fashion designer Christian Dior (1905); actor Telly Savalas (1922); great actor Paul Scofield (1922); actor Steve Reeves (1926); singer-songwriter Richie Havens (1941); singer-songwriter Mac Davis (72); singer-songwriter Billy Ocean (64); sculptor Jeff Koons (59); actor Robby Benson (58); actor Geena Davis (58); and rapper Jam Master Jay (1965).

The day, however, belongs to the comedian Benny Hill who was born on this day in 1924. I know: he is probably not your favorite comedian. But there is no doubt that he was a genius. If you get past all the young models in bikinis, what you find is very well structured—and at times hilarious—comedy. The best example of this is, “Ye Old Wishing Well.” This is an example of perfect comedy writing:

Happy birthday Benny Hill!